Let law take its course

Let law take its course

With the memory of the so-called Monitor case still lingering
in our minds, emotions are now once again heated in large
sections of our community because of what is perceived to be
blasphemous statements made against the Prophet Muhammad. As
anyone who has read the newspapers in the past few days must
know, strong reactions have been provoked among Moslem leaders by
blasphemous remarks about the Prophet Muhammad, which the well-
known psychic Permadi allegedly made during a panel discussion at
Yogyakarta's Gadjah Mada University two years ago. The Attorney
General and the police are now investigating the case.

In the meantime, conflicting reports have been circulating and
varying conclusions drawn. Some have said that the soothsayer,
who is a graduate of the University of Indonesia's prestigious
law school, has branded Prophet Muhammad a dictator. On the other
hand, Permadi himself and his lawyer Adnan Buyung Nasution have
said that the statement about the Prophet Muhammad was
abbreviated and taken out of context in such a way as to create
misunderstanding.

Since Permadi's statement is reported to have been recorded on
tape, the present police investigation seems to be focused on the
recording and on the statements of witnesses. According to
National Police Chief Gen. Banurusman Astrosemito, Permadi could
be prosecuted under an article of the Indonesian criminal law
code which makes it possible for anyone guilty of statements or
acts that are offensive to any of the officially recognized
religions in Indonesia to be punished with a maximum imprisonment
term of five years. According to Gen. Banurusman, the police are
still trying to accumulate as much evidence as is necessary for
prosecution.

In any case, since Indonesia is a country that is based on law
and because everyone is expected to respect the supremacy of the
law and the presumption of innocence, care should be exercised.
Clearly, pronouncing Permadi either guilty or innocent before the
court has handed down its verdict must be avoided. It is in this
context that we see the appeals for calm that have been made by
the authorities in charge of the investigation. These appeals are
not only relevant, but worthy of our serious attention because in
facing sensitive issues of this kind, the authorities have so far
always acted swiftly and competently. After all, allowing such
sensitive issues to create unrest among our people will only lead
to disunity.

The Monitor magazine case in 1990, in which demonstrations to
protest an irreverent readers poll involving the Prophet
Muhammad's name led to the closure of the magazine and the
imprisonment of its editor, should be proof enough of the
authorities' sensitivity in such cases.

One last word of caution: Both cases should also remind us
that if one cannot speak scientifically or factually about
religious issues in this country one should not speak about them
at all. Some topics are simply too sensitive to discuss in public
without taking extra care not to offend anyone.